Federico Reyes Heroles
Michael Ignatieff’s essay La historia de mis privilegios (The history of my privileges) (Letras Libres, July 2024) provoked me. In life, there are periods of light and others of shadows and darkness. The ups and downs of the generation of the brilliant and multifaceted Canadian author impose distance. There is a Mexico that lives in bewilderment.
The election of 2024 broke many benchmarks of democratic life. It had nothing to do with the heartbreaking family history of the Canadian, whose parents survived the rain of the V1 and V2 missiles. But that darkness was followed by the postwar period: De Gaulle, Adenauer, Roosevelt, and Stalin.
In a reflective tone, Ignatieff declares: “I am a child of hope, and I have carried its optimism with me all my life”. His fond recollections of the schools and universities that shaped him, the birth of the United Nations, NATO, the human revolution of flight, medical advances, and the computer, which he equates to having the library of Alexandria at our disposal. He acknowledges the criticisms of his generation’s legacy: wealth in many, prestige in few, and those who remained in academic life without greater pretensions. Yet, there is no disillusionment. This is the crux. The idea of permanent freedoms and progress on the horizon always accompanied them, starkly contrasting the disillusionment that now pervades Mexico.
The syndrome of Mexican bewilderment arises precisely because of those in power today’s open defense of authoritarianism. There are exceptions, but in Mexico’s recent history and, above all, after 1968, 1971, the Dirty War, and the authoritarian exercise of power (espionage, media controls, coups, etc.), a certain democratic decorum permeated the political class. No one spoke out against the division of powers -not even if it was not sincere- or the advancement of human rights. To publicly defend the militarization of the country would have been an act of political suicide.
In response to a telephone call, I heard a governor of Chiapas get up, annoyed from the table, and exclaim: how difficult it is to govern the “indiada”. Monsiváis and I rolled our eyes. That was the way he was educated. Those dinosaurs were gradually isolated, a testament to the progress in Mexican society. Little by little, the idea of gender equality was penetrated. The need to limit the power of Mexican presidentialism was gaining space.
A sense of shame included criticism of the cult of personality, with Echeverría and López Portillo. But perhaps the word prude is not appropriate since it refers to sexual shame. The word restraint might be more accurate: to cover up. Be that as it may, the final result, the product of a growing plurality in multiple spaces, was strengthening a public square in which -whether by conviction or not- the republican discourse was being installed, or so we thought. The disappointment in the failure of this discourse to take root is palpable. It was not like that.
“Not a comma should be changed” should be a severe offense to legislators. The imposition of agenda and staff on the future President is also a serious offense. Now, we see that an exultant, euphoric authoritarian culture was hidden behind the restraint. Six years of an ostentatious daily cult of personality, of threats to independent bodies, of insults, even to the population, the selfish “aspirational” middle classes, and so on. But all of this was applauded and asked for continuity.
The logical culmination: the over-representation that would lead to a Morena vote worth 1.4. The principle of equivalence among voters was trampled with pride. The opposition vote, 46%, decreased to 26% of the seats. Objective: The Constitution is in the hands of Morena. To mock the equality of the vote in this way is to spit on democracy. To rudely seize the Judiciary and a smug defense of over-representation reveals them: they were never Democrats. With the new minister aligned, the appeal of unconstitutionality is an illusion. With AMLO, the number of cases increased tenfold.
Perhaps we live in a parenthesis of democratic impulses that is about to close. It will be so unless the National Electoral Institute and the Electoral Tribunal, 16 Mexicans, look to history.
Further Reading: